The present invention generally relates to methods for checking out merchandise and, more particularly, to methods for automating the checkout of merchandise based on visual pattern recognition integrated with discrete product identification.
In many retail store environments, such as in grocery stores, department stores, office supply stores, home improvements stores, and the like, consumers typically carry selected items in a shopping cart and utilize a checkout stand to pay for the selected items. A checkout stand, or equivalently point-of-sale (POS), can be arranged in many configurations. In general, the checkout stand, often referred to as a lane, includes one or more belts, or merely has a stationary surface, generally supported by a counter or cabinet. A bar code scanner is typically recessed into the counter or cabinet. Also included at the checkout stand are the register, cash drawer, a keyboard, a credit card machine, a receipt printer, monitor or display, telephone and other such accessory equipment.
One goal within the retail industry has been to design the checkout stand in a manner that can expedite the checkout process and provide convenience to the customers and the cashier. However, at times, the experience level of the cashier becomes the major factor that limits the checkout speed. Also, during busy hours, the customer may have to wait in a line to pay for the selected items regardless of the experience level of the cashier, and, in some cases, walk away from the store without purchasing the items they selected. In addition, from time to time, the cashier may need to manually input the price information of items via the keyboard if the scanner fails to read the UPC barcode or the item is sold by weight, which can further slow down the checkout process.
In addition to the checkout speed limitation, the retail industry has another problem to resolve, commonly referred to as “bottom-of-the-basket” (BoB) loss. A typical shopping cart includes a basket that is designed for storage of the consumer's merchandise. At times, a consumer will use the lower shelf space located below the shopping cart basket as additional storage space, especially for relatively large and/or bulky merchandise. On occasion, when a consumer uses the lower shelf space to carry merchandise, the consumer can leave the store without paying for the merchandise. This may occur because the consumer inadvertently forgets to present the merchandise to the cashier during checkout, or because the consumer intends to defraud the store and steal the merchandise. In both cases, the cashier and other store personnel have also failed to identify the BoB items and include them in the transaction. Another source of BoB loss is due to cashier fraud, which can occur when the cashier knows items are on the bottom of the basket and chooses not to ring them up or manually rings up an alternative, less expensive item. This practice is known as collusion or sweethearting.
Estimates suggest that a typical supermarket can experience between $3,000 to $5,000 of bottom-of-the-basket revenue losses per lane per year. For a typical modern grocery store with 10 checkout lanes, this loss represents $30,000 to $50,000 of unaccounted revenue per year. For a major grocery chain with 1,000 stores, the potential revenue recovery can reach in excess of $50 million dollars annually.
Several efforts have been undertaken to minimize or reduce bottom-of-the-basket losses. These efforts generally fall into three categories: process change and training; lane configuration change; and supplemental detection devices.
Process changes and training is aimed at getting cashiers and baggers to inspect the cart for BOB items in every transaction. This approach has not been effective because of high personnel turnover, the requirement of constant training, low skill level of the personnel, lack of mechanisms to enforce the new behaviors, and lack of initiative to track and prevent collusion.
Lane configuration change is aimed at making the bottom of the basket more visible to the cashier, either by bring the cart on a separate side of the lane from the customer, or by using a second cart that requires the customer to fully unload his or her cart and reload the items onto the second cart. Changing lane configuration is expensive, does not address the collusion, and is typically a more inconvenient, less efficient way to scan and check out items. Furthermore, heavy items on the bottom of the basket will be required to be lifted for checkout causing time delay and sometime physical injury from heavy lifting.
Supplemental devices include mirrors placed on the opposite side of the lane to enable the cashier to see BoB items without leaning over or walking around the lane; infrared sensing devices to alert the cashier that there are BoB items, and video surveillance devices to project an image to the cashier. Infrared detection systems, such as those marketed by Kart Saver, Inc. <URL: http://www.kartsaver.com> and Store-Scan, Inc. <URL: http://www.store-scan.com> employ infrared sensors designed to detect the presence of merchandise located on the lower shelf of a shopping cart when the shopping cart enters a checkout lane. Disadvantageously, these systems are only able to detect the presence of an object and are not able to provide any indication as to the identity of the object. Consequently, these systems cannot be integrated with the store's existing checkout subsystems and instead rely on the cashier to recognize the merchandise and input appropriate associated information, such as the identity and price of the merchandise, into the store's checkout subsystem by either bar code scanning or manual key pad entry. As such, alerts and displays for these products can only notify the cashiers of the potential existence of an item, which cashiers can ignore or defeat. Furthermore these systems do not have mechanisms to prevent collusion. In addition, disadvantageously, these infrared systems are relatively more likely to generate false positive indications. For example, these systems are unable to distinguish between merchandise located on the lower shelf of the shopping cart and a customer's bag or other personal items, again causing cashiers to eventually ignore or defeat the system.
Another supplemental device that attempts to minimize or reduce bottom-of-the-basket losses is marketed by VerifEye Technologies <URL: http://www.verifeye.com/products/checkout/checkout.html>. This system employs a video surveillance device mounted in the land and directed at the bottom of the basket. A small color video display is mounted by the register to aid the cashier in identifying if a BoB item exists. Again, disadvantageously, this system is not integrated with the POS, forcing reliance on the cashier to scan or key in the item. Consequently, the system productivity issues are ignored and collusions are not addressed. In one of the VerifEye's systems, an option to log image, time and location is available. This configuration nonetheless does not recover the lost items.
As can be seen, there is a need for improved systems and methods that automatically detect and recognize items, either on the belt of a counter or in the shopping cart of a checkout lane, and replace or supplement a conventional UPC scanning and manual checkout process to increase the checkout speed and eliminate bottom-of-the-basket loss.